https://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2706
--- Comment #9 from Chris Maynard <christopher.maynard@xxxxxxxxx> 2010-12-08 07:11:39 PST ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> I have sent an e-mail to the ITU-T study group 15 at tsbsg15@xxxxxxx, asking
> for clarification. I have no idea if they will respond or not.
Regarding this query, I received a response from Huub van Helvoort
(huub.van.helvoort [AT] huawei.com) today. He also CC'd 2 members of the ITU,
namely Greg.Jones [AT] itu.int and Hiroshi.OTA [AT] itu.int. Here is his
response to me:
=====[BEGIN]=====
Hello Chris,
Thank you for identifying this issue.
The correct text is:
Length: Identifies size, in octets, of the Value field containing the Pattern
Type, Test Pattern and CRC-32.
Note: In a frame where the PDU is limited to 1492 octets, the maximum length
value is 1480 octets (since 12 bytes are required for 8 octets of LBM PDU
overhead, 3 octets of Test TLV overhead, and 1 octet of End TLV). Any other
TLVs, if present in LBM, will furthermore detract from the maximum length value
of 1480. (As one byte is used for Pattern Type, 1475 (Pattern Types 1 and 3) or
1479 (Pattern types 0 and 2) bytes are available for the Test Pattern when no
other TLVs are included.
Y.1731 will be corrected to resolve this issue.
Best regards, Huub van Helvoort, rapporteur Q10.
======[END]======
So closing the bug as invalid was indeed the right thing to do.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug.
